This dissertation examines John Rawls's claim that his theory of justice can avoid discussion of "deep metaphysical claims" which communitarians have alleged to be implicit in his theory. It shows that Rawls's Kantian Constructivism and his method of reflective equilibrium can only establish a priority of moral over non-moral considerations when attempting to resolve political-philosophical disputes.The dissertation goes on to show that once metaphysical considerations are admitted into the debate over the proper theory of justice, a plausible theory of freedom argues for an thoroughgoing egalitarian interpretation of Rawls's principles of justice over a libertarian interpretation.